Mr Wrestling X

I'm split on it myself. It's plausible, purely on the basis that Chavo doing the tribute "underdog" run, would have more emotional impact than Rey Mysterio would have/did have. WWE would have gone to Chavo first, for those reasons, if they were thinking logically - which is always subject to debate. On the other hand, Mysterio was the bigger draw of the two, and as champion, he would have much more long term potential than Chavo as champion. He was also regularly billed as the "ultimate underdog", and was close personal friends with Eddy.

Well, the story goes that Chavo was initially offered the world title push and feud with Randy Orton. WWE wanted to pay tribute to Eddy.... And do some good business at the same time. What better way than for Eddy's nephew, an unlikely world champion, to win the Royal Rumble and then the title at Wrestlemania? I seem to recall Chavo discussing this in some interviews when he left WWE, it also may have been brought up by some others who were with WWE at the time. I guess Chavo simply didn't want to do it. He was fully supportive of Mysterio, so that suggests that Chavo didn't have any issues with the storyline, but rather, he didn't want to play the lead role. Maybe there is a factor of pride in it? Perhaps Chavo felt that he should be a world champion on his own merits as a performer, rather than getting a reign as part of a tribute to his late uncle? All I know is, Mysterio shouldn't have won the Rumble, let alone the world title, at that stage.

Agree with Chavo, his work in WWE's cruiserweight division was stellar. It would have been interesting to see how things would have turned out, had Chavo accepted the "world title" push that he was offered following Eddie Guerrero's death. Obviously, he had his reasons and therefore Rey Mysterio got the rub instead. I honestly thought that Chavo should have had a run with the US or IC title after he dropped the ECW Championship to Kane in 2008. Chavo feuding with Kofi Kingston and eventually (perhaps) William Regal, would have done wonders for the WWE mid card scene. I'd also like to throw William Regal out there. Sure, he's never fallen into obscurity, but he has/had the goods to be a headliner. His demons have always managed to stall it for him, most notably in 2008, where it seemed he was on the cusp of becoming WWE or WH champion.

Not really a big fan of Billy Graham.

The first name that springs to mind for me is - Mike Awesome This guy truly had it all - size, power, speed, agility, a great physique, a star presence, you name it. His feud with Masato Tanaka was brutal, you could truly believe that these two guys not only hated each other and it brought out that charisma in Awesome, which WCW and WWE (to a great extent), failed to. It's a shame that WWE didn't make Awesome into a big player during the Invasion storyline. He could have had choice matches with anybody, if treated like the powerbomb-vending monster that he was meant to be. Awesome died in 2007, but he left behind a really great portfolio of work, in promotions all over the world. Honeslty, it's very possible that had Awesome not gone to WCW and signed with NJPW instead, that he could have been the top Gaijin worker of the decade. Anybody else to add to the thread?

^ I wonder if there is a special signal that tells the wrestlers to go for the old commercial break routine? I don't think I've ever heard any of the referees audibly inform the wrestlers - I'm assuming that the referees communicate this, hence the earpiece.

This. I cannot recall the last time a face team made the hot tag by any other method. 95% of the time, the face team always gets the tag a split second just after the legal heel team member gets his tag. I'd suspect that on many of the occasions where the face team member has got the tag first, it's been down to timing issues.

Seriously, the formula is the SAME every fucking match. I appreciate that the FIP concept is the most popular way of laying out a tag team match, but it's become so fucking predictable in WWE that I switch off the TV or go and do something else when a tag team match is on. - Match beginning: after a short back and forth, face team briefly get the upper hand - Heel team takes control, isolates a member of the face team - Member of face team plays Ricky Morton, heel team make continuous tags - Ricky Morton builds momentum, lots of false hot tags - Ricky Morton hits a big move that evens the score, both legal men go for the tag - Heel legal man gets the tag, a split second later Ricky Morton makes the hot tag - The hot tag man cleans house, followed by a short momentum shift back-and-forth - The finish: the face team gets the win or the heel team gets the win It's so fucking predictable... It's boring, it's not innovative, it's not impressive and anyone who thinks that WWE's tag team matches are great, has settled for mediocrity. I wish WWE looked to AJPW and NOAH for inspiration where tag match booking is concerned. Thoughts?

- The Big Show - Goldberg - Batista - The Undertaker Have all physically dominated Triple H in much more impressive fashion. That was pretty much the only part of the match that sold the concept of Brock being an "unstoppable monster" to me.

No, If it was top 250 then yes, definitely.

Good call. I'm thinking that Earl Hebner has to be a candidate as well.

Where Carlito is concerned, he was a beneficiary of both nepotism in WWC where he has been pushed as the top star whenever he has competed for the company, since his father is in charge. In WWE, one could argue a case of cronyism since the company has always show favouritism towards second and third generation wrestlers. From the very beginning, Carlito received a huge push (by WWE standards) as he went over and won the US title in his debut match against John Cena (who was Smackdown's biggest rising star at that point) no less and received strong booking all the way throughout 2004 and early 2005. Heck, in his first match after being drafted to Raw he went over and won the Intercontinental title and was placed in decent programmes with the likes of Shelton Benjamin and Ric Flair. Carlito has always been outspoken and ballsy enough to risk his company position by talking candid to the press back in Puerto Rico throughout his WWE run. Essentially, Carlito had everything except a decent gimmick.

This has to be one of Vince McMahon's most used idioms and I'm beginning to think that WWE's preferential hiring practises revolve around this concept - both figurative and literally. We all know that McMahon has a penchant for wrestlers with extraordinary physiques, but maybe that's just one part of the equation. See, I get the impression that WWE loves talent who are anything but, ordinary or those who keep up their persona in public, regardless of the modern wrestling scene where social networking media and reality is the "thing". The guys who live pretty quiet lives when not in front of the camera, are often the guys who don't receive decent pushes. I'd put the likes of Kofi Kingston and Jack Swagger in this category, because they don't cause trouble, keep level headed while on the road and don't say or do things that attract attention from the media - whether positive or negative. There are exceptions obviously, like The Miz (who has recieved the main event push previously) but more often than not, you'll find that the most down to Earth wrestlers are the one's who stay in the mid card roles. You then have the likes of CM Punk, who creates controversy on a regular by being outspoken about media figures (his critique of Jon Jones is a recent example) or by being blunt and assertive, regardless of who he is dealing with. That surely qualifies as a "larger than life" personality and is one of the many reasons and definitely one of the more important qualities that he has received an incredible push in the last couple of years (and is firmly established as a top line talent in WWE). Really, the 1980's was the heyday for "larger than life" personalities. Ric Flair's partying and public antics is the stuff of legend, he literally lived (and still does) his character. You then have the more eccentric types such as Andre the Giant (everyone has heard the tipping the car story and/or the one hundred beers in an afternoon) who were known for doing extraordinary things whilst away from the ring. And of course, there are those who maintained strict kayfabe, regardless of the consequences, like Sgt Slaughter (who would have to run from angry mobs during his heel turn) and various wrestlers who would lie about the nature of the business to their friends and family. With this increasing number of actor types (as in those who turn the character on as they walk through the curtain) compared to the "larger than life" types in the modern era of wrestling, could this be the main reason why so few new stars are being made in the WWE?

Yes, there are still wrestlers who are a draw, although maybe not to the days of old when arenas were constantly sold out, when Raw and Nitro were doing anything from 3.0 to 7.0 ratings and when people would pay to see the same match again in the next town. As for modern day draws, I'd say: WWE Full Timers John Cena Randy Orton Rey Mysterio CM Punk The Great Khali (controversial I know, but his presence on the WWE roster attracts a large Indian audience) WWE Part Timers/Non Wrestlers The Undertaker Triple H Brock Lesnar The Rock Steve Austin Shawn Michaels Vince McMahon TNA Full Timers Kurt Angle AJ Styles Jeff Hardy TNA Part Timers/Non Wrestlers Sting Hulk Hogan

I don't put much stock in Meltzer's ratings because he doesn't use seperate ratings for each style of promotion. For example, there is no fucking way that John Cena vs. CM Punk at MITB 2011 equaled ANY of Misawa's, Kawada's or Kobashi's five star efforts.

Take from this what you will, but I currently rate the best workers in WWE as being: 1. CM Punk 2. John Cena 3. Daniel Bryan 4. Randy Orton 5. Sheamus In that order.

I view Angle as very technical, a guy who is all about choreography and putting on "wrestling clinics" (to paraphrase). His audience interactions, expressions and playing to his role as face or heel are usually pretty minimal, whereas someone like Cena uses these concepts to great effect. The Lesnar match at Extreme Rules for instance, featured such great in-ring psychology from Cena (the ending aside, but that's bad booking) that the majority of the audience got behind him (when at least 40% normally boo him) and booed the hell out of Lesnar. But whilst Cena is capable of great things, it's reasonably rare for him to actually put on performances like this (which I again attribute to bad booking by WWE in keeping Cena's character one dimensional and not allowing Cena to wing it, as he did one before, for the fear that he might come across as heel like). So yeah I distinguish the physical and choreographed aspects of wrestling from the ones that involve storytelling and theatrics.

Angle is the better wrestler, Cena is the better talker, draw, psychologist, story teller and most attention grabbing (in the sense that people continue to care about the character regardless of whether they love it or hate it, whereas Angle has constantly alternated between being a top guy, mid carder and upper mid carder throughout his career). So yes, John Cena is a better worker than Kurt Angle, but I'd still rather watch Kurt Angle wrestle than John Cena, purely because I'm a fan of superb wrestling intertwined with excellent storytelling (Angle gets the wrestling but not the storytelling part) than poor to average wrestling intertwined with outstanding in-ring psychology and storytelling (which Cena does consistently, although it isn't very often to my taste).

You may think what you want, but I'm not a "Cena hater", I'm just not fooled by the incredibly flawed booking of the character from day one of his main event push. Do you like Cena, is that why you've once again brought up the fact that I'm incredibly critical of the character? Just because you've settled for mediocrity from professional wrestling, doesn't mean everyone else has to as well. No, it wasn't up to him to decide the manner in which he lost (at least not that we know of), but the fact that WWE creative are incredibly reluctant to put anyone over against John Cena is a major issue. How exactly is anyone supposed to take Cena's feuds seriously when he goes over the heel wrestler clean in their first encounter and then proceed to win each subsequent rematch? If Cena has to go over, why can't they just do an extended build that results in one, and only one singles match - just like Hogan was booked during his heyday? We live in an age where boring invincible heroes are just not popular, media has evolved to the point where people need things to relate to in TV, movie, book, etc, etc characters. Just because John Cena is about never giving up and overcoming the odds, it doesn't mean he has to always win and destroy everybody else in his path. If WWE wants to embrace the "reality era" then they need to embrace reality.

Completely disagree, the fact that John Cena began to attract so much negative criticism was the reason why they aborted his first title reign (which would have been the "Bruno run"). I believe that the only person in the last couple of decades of American wrestling who could have pulled off a "Bruno run" was Steve Austin - but this didn't happen due to injury. WWE again tried a long reign with Cena back in 06, but this was cut off in late 07 due to injury, but even if this hadn't happened, it's likely that Orton, Triple H or Jeff Hardy (had he not been suspended) would have raised the WWE Championship by Wrestlemania XXIV. OTC, Cena hasn't required the 9 reigns (I don't count the reign between MITB and SS last year because Punk was never actually stripped off the WWE Championship) he has had as WWE Champion, lets look at who has ended Cena's reigns and the manner in which they ended, 1. Edge - 2005 (MITB cash in,not a proper match) 2. Rob Van Dam - 2006 (match ended with interference) 3. Nobody - 2007 (injured, stripped of title) 4. Randy Orton (clean) 5. Sheamus (clean) 6. Batista (impromptu title shot, not a proper match) 7. Sheamus (match ended with interference) 8. CM Punk (clean, but match featured a surge of distractions prior to the finish) 9. Alberto Del Rio (triple threat match, Cena wasn't pinned) Out of Cena's 9 title reigns, he's only put 2 of his successors over clean in a fair contest, had he instead followed the pattern of his predecessors like Bruno Sammartino, Bret Hart and The Rock (putting over their successors clean), the succeeding title reign would mean so much more given that it changed hands fairly and after being hold for so long by the de-facto top star of the company. Agreed, even a draw or no-contest would have been more beneficial than the overbooked interference fest that occured at NOC. Had the match ended without a winner, they could have stretched out the storyline further and had Punk eventually beat Triple H fairly to cement himself as a bonafide WWE superstar and he would then go on to capture the WWE Championship as before, but with much more momentum.

It's completely pointless strapping Cena again, and a waste of opportunities for elevating other talent who need a world title reign. John Cena doesn't need any more WWE Championship reigns, he's as over as he will ever be with or without the belt, therefore there isn't any point in him carrying the title. I expect some of the old school purists don't agree, given the philosophy of having the "top guy" as constant champion, but this is a moot point given the way modern international promotions like WWE do business. I see the titles as being more about elevating talent and providing recognition to established talent than being a symbol of the top guy in the business. I suppose titles in WWE are a symbol that the company has faith in an individual as performer and wants to reward them by increasing their PPV, TV and public appearances (which equals more money and better benefits naturally) and in the case of the world titles, it's common knowledge that WWE pays for the champions to travel first class as a perk of being champion.

Chavo Guerrero as Kerwin White - In retrospect, I believe this gimmick would have worked had it been given to a Caucasian-American who played up the middle-class, suburban and very conservative elements of the gimmick - an enemy to the everyman. Hence, you would have a heel with a lot of potential to get over without resorting to somebody performing a kind of minstrel show. Having someone like Guerrero denounce his heritage and drop risque racial comments is just distasteful and offensive. Mistico as Sin Cara - Controversial, I know but I genuinely feel that Mistico was a bad choice for what WWE wants. Namely, they want a guy to succeed Mysterio who is nearing the end of his active in-ring career. Mistico can only work as Mistico, this is what made him so famous in lucha and that is why he hasn't succeeded as Sin Cara. I'm not saying it won't ever happen, but WWE is kidding themselves if they think that a hugely popular luchadore is going to come in, immediately pick up their style and reach overnight levels of popularity with the goal of eventually succeeding Rey Mystero.

I seem to remember Bret occasionally ending a match with his driving elbow from the turnbuckle or using a piledriver, although I think the piledriver was actually used more often prior to him adopting the sharpshooter as his signature move. I think that NintendoLogic is spot on with the assertation that Vince didn't want his top guys all tapping out to Bret, because simply put it's much more credibility breaking for a guy to tap out than it is to take a pinfall loss. However, that idea isn't always true, in some cases the tap out finish can be a logical scenario when a wrestler is unable to use his non-submission finisher against the likes of Big Show, Mark Henry or The Great Khali because they aren't strong enough to safely execute it (as an example, CM Punk has not performed the GTS on anyone larger than Kane and he even struggles lifting Kane off the ground) thereby necessitating that the big guy will dominate and the smaller guy will lock in their submission for the victory. There are only two wrestlers I can think of that have possibly never tapped out in an official match: - The Undertaker: not sure about his pre-deadman days, but Taker has never lost via legitimate submission to anybody, Kurt Angle's triangle choke on an episode of Smackdown in 2002 was the closest anyone has came (Taker tapped whilst Angle still had the hold applied just after Taker got the three count) - The Ultimate Warrior

Double post

Watching the Punk/Kane/Bryan match last night, where Bryan got the win after a well placed kick, it got me thinking about how you rarely see a straightforward match (one that doesn't end in a DQ/count out/no contest, etc) in WWE that doesn't end with one wrestler hitting his/her finisher or locking on their submission finisher en-route to the pinfall or submission victory. When done well, a sudden move out of nowhere and a successful pinfall can be the icing on the cake for a particularly intense match, such as the numerous occasions that Ric Flair would get an inside cradle out of no where after a fearsome battle, or the many wrestlers who have out-maneuvered their opponents and a final chain wrestling battle to hit a bridging suplex or similar move for the victory. As for actual examples, one of my favourites has to be Ric Flair taking out Vader's leg and rolling him up to take the win at Starrcade 1993 after a real battle where Flair couldn't quite build lasting momentum. So, what examples have you?